This Day on the Battlefield: Trenton

OK, so it actually took place on December 25th-26th, but I had other stuff to do. This battle is immensely famous, and rightly so, because it was of monumental strategic importance to American history. While no great tactical success (although the tactics leading up to the battle itself are pretty remarkable), the monumental moral value of this victory must not ever be underestimated, for it may have single-handedly saved the revolutionary fire from sputtering out on the North American continent.

Background:

By the last days of 1776, "the game was pretty near up." According to none other than George Washington himself. While the year had started out highly for the rebels with the taking of Boston in March, the pendulum swung back mercilessly for the redcoats as the year went on- with Washington being repeatedly defeated by General William Howe and forced from New York City. His army had gone from over 10,000 in July to little over 2,000 in December, and would be disintegrating almost entirely in but a scant few days when the one-year enlistments of most of its remaining soldiers expired. Under these conditions, it seemed relatively impossible to raise another army and continue the struggle.

Washington knew that he needed a victory. And in fact, he wrote the phrase "victory or death" on a paper in his office. Of course this presented manifest problems. How would he win a victory with such a dilapidated army, and in such terrible weather conditions as those present at the end of December, 1776?

The Plan:

Washington, camped across the Delaware River, planned to attack a detachment of some 1,500 Hessians encamped in winter quarters at Trenton, New Jersey.

Washington did have somewhat of an advantage with this plan. No one would be expecting an attack in such cold weather. The traditional campaigning season had long since ended. The standard of the time was to camp for the winter in a specific quarters and then march out again during the spring.

Additionally, there was a great feeling of resentment amongst the American colonists at the mere presence of the Hessians on American soil. They viewed this as a conflict between kindred spirits, and the Hessians as a foreign, mercenary interference in that conflict. An attack on the Hessians would thus be an easy motivational tool.

The problem was, of course, that it would be a logistical nightmare for Washington to get his troops across that river. It would be a nighttime crossing of a body of water (always a very difficult maneuver even under the best of circumstances), and what's more, the Delaware River had large chunks of ice in it. And then, after the crossing, Washington would need to march several miles in the snow, and many of his soldiers did not have boots, let alone proper winter clothing.

The March:

Washington did have an ace up his sleeve though- John Glover, the officer who had saved his army in New York in the summer. Glover had been a fisherman before the war, and so had ample experience in seamanship.

Glover ferried Washington's army across the Delaware River, ice and all, with no casualties and in good condition, though it did take longer than Washington would have liked. The march was difficult. Bloody footprints were indeed, left behind in the snow.

The Battle:

Washington wanted to attack the detachment at Trenton before the sun rose, but that was an impossibility at this point. The Continental Army however, did arrive in good order by the early morning, and achieved complete surprise.

Washington occupied the high ground from the north, while John Stark marched into the city from the west. The fog of war was present in earnest when the Hessian commander, Colonel Rall, was told that he was surrounded. Because of this, he attempted to organize a counterattack.

Washington however, was in a very strong position, and easily countered these movements. Colonel Rall himself was mortally wounded in the assault, and the detachment was forced to surrender. It was over in minutes.

After taking the lion's share of the detachment as prisoners, Washington's troops returned to their own quarters.

Aftermath:

The moral value of the victory was immense. It showed that American soldiers could indeed defeat their enemies, and that the revolution was not a hopelessly lost cause. The victory allowed Washington to prevent his army from disintegrating at the end of the year and as the winter broke, more soldiers signed up to the ranks.

Washington had bought his army and his cause time and the good publicity that it desperately needed. The victory was probably singularly responsible for preventing the Continental Army and by extension, the revolution itself, from collapsing. His daring attack against all expectations is indeed a foremost example of the old adage 'fortune favors the bold.'

Washington would go on to win another valuable victory and maintain his momentum in less than two weeks: The Battle of Princeton.

For some famous trivia, the future President James Monroe was present at this battle and was wounded in it.

Refrences:

Mount Vernon's Digital Encyclopedia on the Battle of Trenton.

Battle of Trenton 1776 American Revolution George Washington

This Day on the Battlefield: Trebia

We do not know the exact date of it, but this battle took place around this time in 218 B.C. This was the first major battle of the Second Punic War, where the Carthaginian Commander-in-Chief Hannibal opposed the host of the Roman Consul Tiberius Sempronius Longus near the Trebia River in northern Italy.

Background:

After his famous crossing of the Alps in the autumn, Hanibal, after much labor, arrived in Italy with the core of his army intact. At a small engagement near the Ticinus River, Hannibal defeated the forces of the other Roman Consul, Scipio the Elder. This was mostly a glorified skirmish and the major parts of the two armies took no part in the battle. After his victory, Hannibal moved on, strengthening the forces that had been depleted by his crossing of the Alps and turning the Cisalpine Gauls of the region (who had a long-lasting hatred of the Romans) over to his side.

The Campaign:

After the Gauls turned on the Romans (which Polybius and Livy agree as occurring by a night slaughter, though Livy doesn't make it sound as big a deal - 21.48), Scipio moved his forces toward the Trebia river and met up with his co-Consul Tiberius (who was stationed in Sicily beforehand during the Ticinus affair) at the city of Ariminium. After this, a small skirmish broke out in which the Romans were victorious. This victory spurred Tiberius to accept a general engagement, and it would cost him. Scipio had in fact advised Tiberius not to attack, saying that the Gauls would desert Hannibal during the winter, leaving him weakened in the Spring. Tiberius however, ignored his colleague's advice, showing the weakness that was so often-present in Roman commanders: the insatiable desire for glory and a triumph in Rome. The glory on the field would instead be Hannibal's.

The Disposition of the Forces:

The Roman and allied forces, according to Livy, comprised about 28,000 men all told. The primary emphasis of this force would be on the legionary, working behind his Scutum shield and thrusting forward with his Gladius after an initial round of engaging at a distance with the throw of his two Pilum. A minority of the force was cavalry, which the Romans themselves never truly emphasized throughout most of their military career.

The Carthaginian forces on the other hand, were a quite varied lot, comprising many different peoples and fighting styles. I recall one writer (who I am won't to remember, unfortunately) describing his army as a "gathering of all the nations and races of the world." There were African spearmen, swordsmen from Iberia with short swords, and the unruly Celts with their longswords. Hannibal's cavalry force, the Numidians, was excellent, and had earlier allowed him to prevail at the Ticinus. A number of other cavalry served in his ranks as well which was generally superior to Rome's. The "Carthaginians" probably numbered slightly less than the Romans.

Map of the Battle

The Battle:

1st Phase:

The battle began with the Roman cavalry charging after the Numidians, who continuously eluded them. During the meantime the Romans moved forward in proper legionary formation, and the Carthaginian missile troops covered the heavier infantry as they moved up to engage.

2nd Phase:

Now the Carthaginian cavalry made an attack on the Roman cavalry, and defeated them on both flanks. The elephants, which the Romans had certainly never trained or prepared for and had no experience with up until now, also charged the center of the Roman line. Yet despite this, the Romans, according to Livy (21.55), did hold firm for a time, and even had success in turning the elephants back against their own men. (21.56)

The frontal infantry assault, too, did seem to go well for the Romans. As expected, they were pushing back the African and Gallic infantry.

3rd Phase:

The frontal assault was just that, however...a front. Not noticing that their cavalry had been defeated on both flanks, the Roman flanks came under withering missile fire and a cavalry assault. It was here that the lynchpin of Hannibal's trap fell down on the Romans.

Hannibal earlier had sent out a force of 2,000 men under his brother Mago consisting of 1,000 infantry and the same amount of cavalry. This ambushing force now came out of hiding and attacked the Roman rear, causing much chaos. The Roman formations began to fall apart, and the victorious infantry in the center, seeing that they could do nothing to help their comrades, fell back to Placentia.

Aftermath:

This defeat was not catastrophic, but it announced with full force that the Romans had a dangerous enemy in their midst in Italy. New elections were held in Rome (Livy,  21.57), and the weary city elected Gnaeus Servilius Geminus and Gaius Flaminius Nepos as Consuls.

These two men would go on to witness the genius of Hannibal at even greater heights in the coming year of 217 B.C.

For Rome, dark days were ahead.

Sources:

Polybius, Histories, Book 3. Tufts University, Perseus Digital Library. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234%3Abook%3D3%3Achapter%3D67

Livy, The History of Rome: Book 21. (J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., London, 1905) Trans: Rev. Canon Roberts. Edited by Ernest Rhys. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/txt/ah../Livy/Livy21.html Battle of Trebiea 218 B.C. Rome Carthage Hannibal 2nd Punic War

This Day on the Battlefield: Austerlitz

Well, it was actually on December 2nd and this entry is a day late, but whatever. This battle was an immensely important part of modern history. Ironically, the outcome of the action wasn't of much long-term importance to France, but rather its greatest rival for the coming century-and-a-half, the rising nation of Germany. It can truly be said that France's greatest general- Napoleon Bonaparte, was the grandfather of its coming principal antagonist. History is not without a strong sense of irony.

Background:

In 1805, Napoleon, Emperor of the French, was facing the Third Coalition- an alliance led by Great Britain, Austria, and Russia. After the disastrous defeat at Trafalgar earlier in the year, Napoleon knew that an invasion of Britain was now impossible, and he made the correct decision to deal with his Continental enemies- the Austrians and Russians.

The Coronation of Napoleon

The Campaign:

In addition to his mastery of battlefield tactics, Napoleon was also a masterful military organizer who revolutionized the way units were put together, moved, and supplied themselves. He was the innovator of the corps system. Each corps would be under the command of one of his senior officers, and each would be responsible for its own line of march and supply. This allowed his armies to march longer, farther, and more efficiently than their opponents. There are many who say that winning a battle is not a matter of tactics, but of organizing for it, and Napoleon was preeminent in this art during his storied career. The Austerlitz Campaign is perhaps the best example.

Napoleon crossed the Rhine on September 25th. This was already very late in the season to begin a campaign, and Napoleon's intention was to crush his enemies before they could concentrate their forces.

His opponent in the initial stages was the Austrian general Karl Mack, who marched his forces into Bavaria without waiting for the Russians to arrive and reinforce him. This is precisely what Napoleon wanted. The Austrian concentrated his forces around the town of Ulm, which Napoleon made his primary objective.

This is where the brilliance of the corps system showed itself. Napoleon directed each one toward Ulm, closing the noose around Mack's neck. Mack was compelled to surrender, taking a sizable force out of commission that could now no longer be utilized against the French when the decisive moment arrived.

Napoleon takes the surrender of Mack

It was at this point that Napoleon needed to consider the possibility of Prussian intervention. He skilfully conducted a non-aggression pact over the tomb of Frederick the Great to nullify this possibility. The adept diplomacy did not stop there. The Holy Roman Emperor, Francis II, offered an armistice to Napoleon. The French Emperor had nothing to gain from a cessation of hostilities at this point, and so offered terms that were deliberately punitive: Austria to abandon Tyrol and Venice and the retreat of the Russians to Poland. These terms were, as Napoleon planned, rejected.

Though he only had 35,000 men, the Russian commander, Mikhail Kutuzov, crossed the Danube and drove back a French detachment. Napoleon responded to the defeat in stride and seized Vienna, which had been abandoned.

Napoleon still intended to destroy Kutuzov's force before it could link up with any others, but one of his underlings, Marshal Joachim Murat, negotiated an armistice wherein the Russians would leave Germany. A furious Napoleon ordered his subordinate to attack, but this was indecisive, and the Russo-Austrian forces gathered strength. The two forces would meet near Austerlitz.

The Battle:

Napoleon's position was strong, but that of his Russian and Austrian enemies was not. Their columns were isolated.

Phase I:

A Coalition attack toward the French right was repulsed. The offensive was centered toward the French stationed in the village of Telnitz, and with reinforcements by Marshal Davout, the situation was stabilized.

Phase II:

Napoleon had in fact deliberately kept his right weak, so that he could attack in strength toward his primary objective. When he saw that his enemy's center was weakened, the French Emperor ordered an attack toward the area known as Pratzen Heights, which was the lynchpin of the Russo-Austrian line.

A cavalry charge into the Russo-Austrian line nearly killed the Russian Grand Duke Constantine and destroyed the cavalry brigade of General Liechtenstein of the Austrians.

French Cuirassiers

Phase III:

Now the finishing touches were administered by Napoleon. The IV Corps under Marshal Soult marched toward the French right and made a flank and rear attack on the enemy. Now that they were pressed everywhere, the Russo-Austrians were forced to retreat in confusion.

Aftermath:

Peace was arranged with the Treaty of Pressburg, ending the War of the Third Coalition. France was now the preeminent power in Germany, eclipsing the Austrians. Francis II would in the next year renounce the ancient title of Holy Roman Empire, at last dissolving the anachronistic entity that had lasted for a millennium. Napoleon would consolidate the former Imperial territories and principalities into the much more compact Confederation of the Rhine to serve as a buffer between France and its principal Continental enemies- Prussia, Austria, and Russia.

The Holy Roman Empire in 1789

Its replacement, the Confederation of the Rhine, at maximum in 1812 (by ziegelbrenner)

Assessment:

The political consequences of this battle- the dissolution and replacement of the old Holy Roman Empire, were monumental. Though Napoleon would go down to defeat in the end, the victors of the Napoleonic Wars opted to keep his idea of a German league (the German Confederation) and did not attempt to restore the Holy Roman Empire. The several hundred polities that composed the old entity were thus reduced to around forty, with Austria and Prussia the preeminent figures in the organization.

The first major step toward German unification had thus at last taken place. Prussia and Austria (and later on, France) would go on to decide the fate of the new Germany in the latter half of the century.

The German Confederation after the Napoleonic Wars

Sources:

Edward Cust, Annals of the Wars of the Nineteenth Century, (London: John Murray, Albemarle Street, 1863)

Reginald George Burton, From Boulogne to Austerlitz, Napoleon’s Campaign of 1805, (London: George Allen & Company, LTD, 1912)

Walter Scott, The Life of Napoleon, (Philadelphia: E.L. Carey and A. Hart, 1839) Battle of Austerlitz 1805 Napoleon Bonaparte